1. I'm assuming an "oculus" is an eyeball. I don't think clinical tone requires you to use the $10 word over the $0.25 word here. You can call it an eyeball.

2. First of all, putting a 1m flying eyeball in a 64 cubic meter room isn't exactly "sufficient" enough for it to fly around in. Second of all, on the same line, stating a "minimum size" for containment sort of defeats the purpose. The state of Iowa is a minimum of 4m x 4m x 4m in size, but I assume he's not allowed to be contained in the entirety of Iowa. Containment should state maximums if anything, and even better, either specific sizes or references to some kind of "standard" containment arrangement. Perhaps a Foundation standard aviary for airborne phenomena.

3. There are a lot of grammar and style irregularities. I would conclude English isn't your first language? Turns of phrase like "A minimum of one subject of any kind must be having direct eye contact at all times" are just oddly structured. You'll want subject-strong verb-object: At least one individual must maintain eye contact at all times.

4.

A team of three must be station outside the door of the confinement area, for most of the day. Each week, there will be a new team that will be stationed for item SCP-1143-A7. One of the entrusted personnel must keep eye on the entity, and the other two may enter the confined area (if needed) for tasks such as, interviewing, maintenance of room, etc, and may do whatever is deemed "useful" for further research on this entity. Each personnel will change the roles every 4 hours.

This is such strange phrasing, beyond the grammatical errors. What is "most of the day"? Are there literally three different people used every week? Do groups of three rotate month by month? It just seems inefficient to have to train groups of three people over and over again for what basically amounts to 173 duty. Why change roles every four hours? I mean, most of the "roles" will consist of just sitting there, watching it.

5. You should probably just say "bat", or at least include that somewhere near "chiroptera", to save the reader the inevitable Google search.

6. You really don't need any of these expungements, but so we're clear, there's only one Great Lake with four letters in its name.

7.

Whomever the interviewer is, they must not show these hand-gestures: [REDACTED] Reason: Some people are imbeciles, and do not understand the severity of what it will cause them.

That's really particularly non-clinical phrasing, an evidently not-terribly-useful redaction, and this statement doesn't do anything in particular to advance the article. Why would anybody be making any hand gestures at a floating eyeball, and if they would be inclined to do it, why wouldn't we need to know exactly what it is? And if there's a specific reason why we shouldn't (i.e. "floating eyeball mad, and you wouldn't like floating eyeball when it's mad"), why wouldn't that be specified?

8. No, literally though, how is it speaking? Telepathy? Like, from when the interview begins, it's as though nobody's literally concerned about the fact that the subject is a flying eyeball that's talking. I don't know if it's intended that there will be more added to this, but you just casually drop that there are "colonies" all over the Northern Hemisphere (why would the Equator be some kind of obstacle?)

9. Beyond all of this, this really should be either scarier than it is or more surprisingly not-scary than it is. You set up that they're flying eyeballs with mind control powers, and at the end, it's telling vacation stories. It would be one thing if you made the thing truly terrifying and then suddenly jerked it rightward by demonstrating that there's actually nothing to be afraid of (it's just a boring middle-aged dad nightmare with no hostile intent whatsoever), but you never really completely do either of those things. It just looks like one thing, and then sort of acts like something else. Based on what I just said, I think there really is potential for this concept, but it'll have to be executed considerably more delicately. You might consider trying to find a co-writer or collaborator who can fine-tune the English if you don't think you can nail that part down.

All in all, execution needs work, but the concept could really be something spectacular under different circumstances.

Thanks for the criticism, I'm not that good at execution, I'm more of an idea guy. I'll take your advice and ask for a person who can properly execute the project.

Here are my answers on the points:

1. I was going for a scientist-like point, thanks for the important point, will save time.
2. Well, I was wondering what do you think a sufficient area for flying is?
3. English is my first language, but since I'm influenced by "ethnic languages", I probably imagine I'm not that good at it. I also used Grammarly for this.
4. Yeah, basically SCP-173 roles. Just that only one person is needed.
5. Same as the first point's answer.
6. I meant to put as a random lake, FYI.
7. As mentioned earlier in the statement, some imbeciles, i.e: D-Class, might do it.
8. It's not telepathy, it just happens. Will change on that. Ok.
9. That's what I was going for! As mentioned earlier, not good at executions. I will do as you said and try and find a co-writer/collaborator.